- From: Alberto Reggiori <alberto@asemantics.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 16:51:32 +0100
- To: andy.seaborne@hp.com
- Cc: "'RDF Data Access Working Group'" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Andy, for the record, here are our answers/input to your syntax issues On Feb 11, 2005, at 10:02 PM, Seaborne, Andy wrote: > > This is about tuning the current syntax, post-WD2 publication, not > redesigning the whole thing. > > 1/ Bound > > This is special because it tests the variable, not the value. It's > the only > case where this happens. > > The suggestion (PatH) was to make this different. In other > programming languages, there is just a plain function like many other > library functions. It returns a value (a boolean) like any other > function. > > Options: > 1a/ BOUND(?x) -- as the current grammar +1 for current form in the grammar > 1b/ BOUND[?x] -- different grouping > > Anything with a colon in it will look like a qname. > > BOUND ?x is dangerous as it does not express the tight binding nature > of > this operator: "BOUND ?x && ?y" is strange. > > I prefer "BOUND(?x)" -- leave as is. > BOUND[] as a one-off is over doing it. > > 2/ AND > > AND is a special keyword that starts constraints (SUCH THAT would be > better > but its two words). Currently in the grammar it is required because > ?x-?y is unclear : can be "?x binary minus ?y" or two expressions "?x" > then "unary minus ?y" please keep AND for this round still > > Proposal: use [] to mark constraints (see below). > > 3/ OPTIONALS > > There are two syntactic forms "OPTIONAL" and "[]" > > Proposal: just the OPTIONAL form, freeing up [] for constraints. ok to drop [] and use only OPTIONAL keyword > > 4/ Functions , casting and specials. > &ex:foo() , xsd:byte(23) , isBlank(?x) we are neutral about this one > 5/ LOAD => WITH > > The word "LOAD" suggests, to some people, a permanent change to the > database which is a wrong implication. DaveB suggested changing the > word to "WITH". I have done this change (rq23 and the tests). ok for WITH change > > 6/ Clause order > > The current order is: > > BASE > PREFIX > SELECT > WITH > FROM > WHERE > LIMIT > > which is a mixed style. It would make sense to have WITH and FROM > before SELECT (declarations first) and have LIMIT before WHERE > (modifier to SELECT). It has confused some RDQL users that FROM comes > after SELECT. ok for given order - but please add few lines explaining BASE keyword in the prolog, still only mentioned into grammar/bnf in ver. 1.207 Yours Alberto - Alberto Reggiori, @Semantics S.R.L. www.asemantics.com
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2005 15:51:37 UTC